1 thought on “Welcome to the Program!”

1. Dasharah Green (she/her) September 14, 2020 at 6:54 pm

   This week’s reading of The Undercommons was one of the more difficult texts I’ve ever read. During the reading, I made it a point to assess my feelings while engaging with the literature. I felt the wording to be extremely heavy with each sentence being heavier than the last. The difficulty of the text was odd for me considering the revolutionary context of the reading. Harney and Moten’s ideology is anti-establishment and anti-institution with abolitionist frameworks. The text discusses the exclusiveness of American society that leads to the inability for Black people to occupy various spaces. In understanding this critique, the density within the writing of the text in articulating these ideals were contradictory in my opinion. I understand the undercommons to be a communal space for people who have been excluded. Those who occupy the undercommons may not have particular identity markers in common, but share in the belonging of a community that has been denied resources. This communal space seems to be inclusive to those who can articulate why and/or how they’ve been denied those resources. The articulation of their exclusion is far more complex than the basis of race, gender or class. It is clear within the reading that the communal space includes those who have the ability to fully understand and engage with the institution but lack the resources and backing to inhabit the space freely. In other words, the undercommons are a space for those who have the power to fight towards dismantling the institution from within but are purposefully excluded in order to preserve the politics that uphold the system, Harney and Moten write, “Her labor is as necessary as it is unwelcome. The university needs what she bears but cannot bear what she brings. And on top of all that, she disappears. She disappears into the underground, the downlow lowdown maroon community of the university, into the undercommons of enlightenment, where the work gets done, where the work gets subverted, where the revolution is still black, still strong,” (26). The undercommons is hailed as a place of liberation”where the work gets subverted, where the revolution is still [B]lack, still strong.” The work of Black scholars and scholars that work to abolish oppressive regimes of academia do work that is necessary for the university but reveals systemic issues the university has no space to resolve. The necessity within the scholarship serves as a facade for free speech and enlightened pedagogy. However, free speech is only that on the surface. Below the surface of free speech and enlightened thinking are conversations around abolishing historically oppressive systems. The institution is enticing for those privileged enough to access it because of the exclusivity of the space.
   The abolitionist ideals of the reading stood out most for me. In the text Freedom is a Constant Struggle, Angela Davis promotes abolishing the prison industrial complex. She argues the history of the prison system is reform, which is how the system has reached its present state. The only way to create a justice system of punishment is to abolish our current system and design a new system based on preventative methods. Harney and Moten echo these sentiments of abolishing prisons by analyzing the relationship between universities and jail, they write, “The slogan on the Left, then, “universities, not jails,” marks a choice that may not be possible. In other words, perhaps more universities promote more jails. Perhaps it is necessary finally to see that the university produces incarceration as the product of its negligence. Perhaps there is another relation between the University and the Prison – beyond simple opposition or family resemblance – that the undercommons reserves as the object and inhabitation of another abolitionism,” (page 41). They argue more universities promote more jails. The connection comes from the university’s negligence. To my understanding, the university’s negligence exists with its white supremist patriarchal capitalist design. The power of the institution comes from its exclusivity. The university holds itself on a pedestal of unattainability, so for those who are able to attain a position within it belong to a prestigious group. Those who fail to attain a position, unlike those that exist within the undercommons who understand the politics at play, land on the failing end of Darwinism. Even if those outside of the university or undercommons don’t find themselves in physical prison they become imprisoned within the losing end of white supremist patriarchal capitalism.

   Reply ↓